Feeney Amendment and ex post facto laws
Ruling it is "procedural rather than substantive," the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has joined other circuits in applying the PROTECT Act's de novo review of federal sentences to appeals that were pending when the act was passed.
(Free registration required).
Pre-Feeney, a judge's decision to grant a downward departure was subject to an abuse of discretion standard of review. (Koon v. United States). The Feeney Amendment provided that sentencing decisions would not be subject to de novo review. The Feeney Amendment applied retroactively.
The legal issue is fascinating. We know that a change in a rule of evidence that makes it easier for the prosecution to prove a defendant's guilt violates the ex post facto clause. It seems to me that a procedural rule that makes a harsher sentence more likely also violates the ex post facto clause.
A blog devoted to law, politics, philosophy, & life. Nothing in this blog is to be construed as legal advice.
Tuesday, April 13, 2004
Half a cup of justice
County Attorney Barbara LaWall hired James Stuehringer to represent Peasley as he fought disbarment for allowing former Tucson Police Department Officer Joseph Godoy to lie on the stand in two capital murder trials.
If these charges are true, then a prosecution must follow.
County Attorney Barbara LaWall hired James Stuehringer to represent Peasley as he fought disbarment for allowing former Tucson Police Department Officer Joseph Godoy to lie on the stand in two capital murder trials.
If these charges are true, then a prosecution must follow.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Blog Archive
-
▼
2004
(138)
- ► 04/18 - 04/25 (2)
- ▼ 04/11 - 04/18 (2)
- ► 04/04 - 04/11 (4)
-
►
03/28 - 04/04
(8)
- If numbers do not change meaning over time, then w...
- The right to privacy The pro-abortion forces th...
- Race, One-hundred & twenty-nine years later. In...
- CrimLaw Since I have been getting some high qua...
- Leggo my ‘ego I have been reading with much lau...
- A new blog This new blog, Crime & Federalism, l...
- Excepting their way around the Fourth Amendment… ...
- The Fourth Amendment has been re-written "The r...
-
►
03/21 - 03/28
(6)
- Hearsay hearings In California, as well as many...
- Sympathy? CrimLaw notes an article discussing t...
- Standing after Pringle In Maryland v. Pringle (...
- Not out to save your soul... The confession of ...
- Oh how the times have changed The author of a 1...
- Priorities Which is more important to you as a ...
- ► 03/14 - 03/21 (5)
-
►
02/29 - 03/07
(7)
- Death penalty stuff A year ago I counted heads ...
- Special annoucement from John Edwards today at 4 ...
- BREAKING NEWS West to face criminal charges for ga...
- Jeremy Blachman hits 100,000 Jeremy asks a favo...
- Doug Kmiec on Locke v. Davey... ...can be found...
- Fourth Amendment summary on exceptions to the warr...
- In good company when making mistakes... "Every ...
-
►
02/22 - 02/29
(7)
- No one ever gets framed, really... High School ...
- Sabri Reply Brief ...is available here. Note t...
- On children and puppies At Crescat Sententia, a...
- Pleasure reading You can't go wrong reading Ken...
- Kid 'n Play The Lock v. Davey decision is now a...
- Heck v. Humphrey & Section 1983 Muhammad v. Clo...
- Lawyer loses $150 an hour for poor writing. In ...
-
►
02/15 - 02/22
(22)
- No meal reimbursement for work on Christmas Day ...
- Legal writing in Rush Limbaugh case... Thanks t...
- Capitalism meets Christ I am a Christian and I ...
- "Getting More from Google" If you are a googlep...
- Dead, but not forgotten See this post at Legal ...
- A new blog From what I can tell, Criminal Appea...
- Ex Enron CEO indicted here.Jeff Skilling's lawy...
- Breath out, start up. CrimLaw links to an artic...
- ► 02/08 - 02/15 (21)
- ► 02/01 - 02/08 (17)
- ► 01/25 - 02/01 (23)
- ► 01/18 - 01/25 (5)
- ► 01/11 - 01/18 (1)
- ► 01/04 - 01/11 (7)
-
►
2003
(14)
- ► 12/28 - 01/04 (6)
- ► 12/21 - 12/28 (8)